Cultural genocide or culturicide is a concept described by Polish lawyer Raphael Lemkin in 1944, in the same book that coined the term genocide.[1] The destruction of culture was a central component in Lemkin's formulation of genocide.[1] Though the precise definition of cultural genocide remains contested, the United Nations makes it clear that genocide is "the intent to destroy a national, ethnic, racial or religious group... it does not include political groups or so called 'cultural genocide'" and that "Cultural destruction does not suffice, nor does an intention to simply disperse a group" thus this is what "makes the crime of genocide so unique".[2] While the Armenian Genocide Museum defines culturicide as "acts and measures undertaken to destroy nations' or ethnic groups' culture through spiritual, national, and cultural destruction",[3] which appears to be essentially the same as ethnocide. The drafters of the 1948 Genocide Convention initially considered using the term, but later dropped it from inclusion.[4][5][6]
Culturicide involves the eradication and destruction of cultural artifacts, such as books, artworks, and structures.[7] The issue is addressed in multiple international treaties, including the Geneva Conventions and the Rome Statute, which define war crimes associated with the destruction of culture. Cultural genocide may also involve forced assimilation, as well as the suppression of a language or cultural activities that do not conform to the destroyer's notion of what is appropriate.[7] Among many other potential reasons, cultural genocide may be committed for religious motives (e.g., iconoclasm which is based on aniconism); as part of a campaign of ethnic cleansing in an attempt to remove the evidence of a people from a specific locale or history; as part of an effort to implement a Year Zero, in which the past and its associated culture is deleted and history is "reset".
Some ethnologists, such as Robert Jaulin, use the term ethnocide as a substitute for cultural genocide,[8] although this usage has been criticized as risking the confusion between ethnicity and culture.[9]
The term "cultural genocide" has been considered in various draft United Nations declarations, but it is not used by the UN Genocide Convention.[8]
The notion of 'cultural genocide' was acknowledged as early as 1944, when lawyer Raphael Lemkin distinguished a cultural component of genocide.[10] In 1989, Robert Badinter, a French criminal lawyer known for his stance against the death penalty, used the term "cultural genocide" on a television show to describe what he said was the disappearance of Tibetan culture in the presence of the 14th Dalai Lama.[11] The Dalai Lama would later use the term in 1993[12] and again in 2008.[13]
Proposed inclusion in the UN's DRIP
The concept of cultural genocide was originally included in drafts of the 1948 Genocide Convention[4][5][6] but was later dropped due to vetoing by France and Great Britain.[14]
Indigenous peoples have the collective and individual right not to be subjected to ethnocide and cultural genocide, including prevention of and redress for:
(a) Any action which has the aim or effect of depriving them of their integrity as distinct peoples, or of their cultural values or ethnic identities;
(b) Any action which has the aim or effect of dispossessing them of their lands, territories or resources;
(c) Any form of population transfer which has the aim or effect of violating or undermining any of their rights;
(d) Any form of assimilation or integration by other cultures or ways of life imposed on them by legislative, administrative or other measures;
(e) Any form of propaganda directed against them.
This wording only ever appeared in a draft. The DRIP—which was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly during its 62nd session at UN Headquarters in New York City on 13 September 2007—only makes reference to genocide once, when it mentions "genocide, or any other act of violence" in Article 7. Though the concept of "ethnocide" and "cultural genocide" was removed in the version adopted by the General Assembly, the sub-points from the draft noted above were retained (with slightly expanded wording) in Article 8 that speaks to "the right not to be subject to forced assimilation."[16]
List of cultural genocides
The term has been used to describe the destruction of cultural heritage in connection with various events which mostly occurred during the 20th century:
Europe
Historian Stephen Wheatcroft states that the Soviet peasantry was subject to cultural destruction during the creation of the "New Soviet man",[17] Lynne Viola makes a similar characterization of Collectivization in the Soviet Union adding a noted colonial character to the project in their observation of the event.[18]
2004 unrest in Kosovo.[22] In an urgent appeal,[23] issued on 18 March by the extraordinary session of the Expanded Convocation of the Holy Synod of Serbian Orthodox Church (SPC), it was reported that a number of Serbian churches and shrines in Kosovo had been damaged or destroyed by Albanian rioters. At least 30 sites were completely destroyed, more or less destroyed, or further destroyed (sites that had been previously damaged).[24]
After the Greek Civil War, Greek authorities had conducted a cultural genocide upon Slavic Macedonians in Northern Greece through prohibition of communication in Slavic languages, renaming of cities, towns and villages (Lerin/Лерин to Florina etc.), deportation of Slavic Macedonians, particularly women and children, as well as many other actions intended to marginalize and oppress the Slavic Macedonians residing in Northern Greece. While some of these actions had been motivated by political ideology, as many of the Slavic Macedonians had sided with the defeated communists, the majority of actions were committed to wipe out any traces of Slavic Macedonians or their culture in Northern Greece.[25][26]
Turkey: Especially in the island of Imbros. The island was primarily inhabited by ethnic Greeks from antiquity until approximately the 1960s, when many were forced to flee due to a campaign of cultural genocide and discrimination enacted by the Turkish government.[27] Massive scale persecution against the local Greeks started in 1961, as part of the Eritme Programmi operation that aimed at the elimination of Greek education and the enforcement of economic, psychological pressure and violence. Under these conditions, the Turkish government approved the appropriation of >90% of the cultivated areas of the island and the settlement of additional 6,000 ethnic Turks from mainland Turkey.[28][29] Finally, the island was also officially renamed by Turkey in 1970 to Gökçeada to finalize the removal of any remaining Greek influence.
Francoist Spain: the alleged prohibition of the use of minority languages such as Catalan or Galician in the public space, from schools to shops, public transport, or even in the streets, the banning of the use of Catalan or Galician birth names for children, the renaming of cities, streets and all toponyms from Catalan, Basque or Galician to Castilian-Spanish, and the abolition of government and all cultural institutions in Catalonia as well as in Basque Country and Galicia with the goal of total cultural suppression and assimilation.[30]
John D. Hargreaves writes that "A policy of cultural genocide was implemented: the Catalan language and key symbols of Catalan independent identity and nationhood, such as the flag (the senyera), the national hymn ('Els Segadors') and the national dance (the sardana), were proscribed. Any sign of independence or opposition, in fact, was brutally suppressed. Catalan identity and consequently the Catalan nation were threatened with extinction."[31]
Although Josep Pla and other Catalan authors published books in Catalan in the 1950s, and even there were prizes of Catalan Literature during Francoism like the Premi Sant Jordi de novel·la, editorial production in Catalan never recovered the peak levels it had reached before Spanish Civil War[32]Història de l'edició a Catalunya. A prominent case of popularization of Catalan was Joan Manuel Serrat: although he could compose Catalan songs and gained certain notoriety, he was not allowed to sing in Catalan in the Eurovision contest its La, la, la. theme, and was replaced by Spanish singer Massiel, who won the Eurovision contest.[33] Overall, despite some tolerance as Franco's regime relaxed in the late 60s and early 70s, Catalan and the rest of minority languages of Spain were strictly banned from higher education, administration and all official endeavors, thus being in practice confined to the private sphere and domestic uses (see Language policies of Francoist Spain).
The cultural relationship between the Welsh and English has been shaped by the military, political, economic and cultural power exercised by the more populous English over the Welsh for many centuries. The Anglo-Norman kings of England had conquered Wales militarily by the 13th century, and under Henry VIII the country was incorporated into the Kingdom of England by the Laws in Wales Acts in the 16th century.[34]19th-century Anglo-Saxonism led to theories of English racial superiority that described the Welsh as racially inferior. Around the same time, English and Scottish industrialists began establishing iron works and other heavy industry in the coalfield of south Wales. Many elements of the Welsh economy and society since then have been shaped by demands from England.[34] For example, in the mid-19th century, Welsh was demoted to the language of the crass and uneducated by the British government in Wales' schools.[34] This has led to a decline in the use of the Welsh language and is seen by some as representative of an overall loss of Welsh culture at the hands of the English. The rise of second homes, from England, in Wales is also contributing to the decline of the Welsh language. In some places, the concentration of second homes is so high that up to 46% of the local housing stock can be empty for parts of the year, with the Welsh natives set to become a minority in their own country.[35][36] This is pushing out many younger Welsh speakers, As more communities become places for holiday lets, rural and village schools close. This in turn weakens the predominance of Welsh as the default language in particular communities.[37]
When at the mid-19th century, primary school is made compulsory all across the State, it is also made clear that only French will be taught, and the teachers will severely punish any pupil speaking in patois. The aim of the French educational system will consequently not be to dignify the pupils' natural humanity, developing their culture and teaching them to write their language, but rather to humiliate them and morally degrade them for the simple fact of being what tradition and their nature made them. The self-proclaimed country of the "human rights" will then ignore one of man's most fundamental rights, the right to be himself and speak the language of his nation. And with that attitude France, the "grande France" that calls itself the champion of liberty, will pass the 20th century, indifferent to the timid protest movements of the various linguistic communities it submitted and the literary prestige they may have given birth to.
[...]
France, that under Franco's reign was seen here [in Catalonia] as the safe haven of freedom, has the miserable honour of being the [only] State of Europe—and probably the world – that succeeded best in the diabolical task of destroying its own ethnic and linguistic patrimony and moreover, of destroying human family bonds: many parents and children, or grandparents and grandchildren, have different languages, and the latter feel ashamed of the first because they speak a despicable patois, and no element of the grandparents' culture has been transmitted to the younger generation, as if they were born out of a completely new world. This is the French State that has just entered the 21st century, a country where stone monuments and natural landscapes are preserved and respected, but where many centuries of popular creation expressed in different tongues are on the brink of extinction. The "gloire" and the "grandeur" built on a genocide. No liberty, no equality, no fraternity: just cultural extermination, this is the real motto of the French Republic.
Ukraine. As of February 29, 2024, according to the published data of the Prime Minister of Ukraine, Serhiy Shmyhal, about 900 objects of national heritage were damaged or destroyed in the occupied zones of Ukraine, and more than 20 thousand cultural monuments are under occupation.[45][46][47]
Historian Sarah Cameron believes that while the Kazakh famine of 1931–1933 combined with a campaign against nomads was not genocide in the sense of the Genocide Convention's definition, it complies with Raphael Lemkin's original concept of genocide, which considered destruction of culture to be as genocidal as physical annihilation.[17]
The Sinicization of Tibet from the 1950s onwards. Following the 1959 Tibetan uprising, 97% of Tibet's monasteries were destroyed, while 2 million Tibetans, including 500,000 nomadic farmers, were relocated to newly created urban centers.[61]
The persecution of Sri Lankan Tamils during the Sri Lankan Civil War was a campaign of ethnic cleansing which was sponsored by the government and it has continued until the present day as a part of the Sinhalaisation of the northern and eastern parts of the island.
The persecution of Uyghurs in China. Some one million members of China's MuslimUyghur minority have been detained in massive detention camps, termed "reeducation camps", which exist for the purpose of changing the political thinking, identities and religious beliefs of the detainees, under the guise of "anti-terrorism".[64] Satellite evidence suggests that China has also razed more than two dozen Uyghur Muslim religious sites to the ground.[65]
In the mid-1800s to early 1900s, the United States established American Indian boarding schools to assimilate Native American children and youth into Euro-American culture.
In 2007, a Canadian Member of Parliament criticized the Ministry of Indian Affairs' destruction of documents that were evidence to the "cultural genocide" imposed on Indigenous peoples within Canada.[67]
In 2015, Chief Justice Beverly McLachlin, of the Supreme Court of Canada, stated in a speech to the Global Centre for Pluralism that Canada's historical treatment of Indigenous peoples was an attempt at cultural genocide, and "the worst stain on Canada's human-rights record."[69]
